search_images

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description carries full transparency burden. It discloses the output content (URLs, thumbnails, dimensions, source pages, metadata), which is useful. However, it does not explicitly state that the operation is read-only, nor does it mention any rate limits, restrictions, or other behavioral nuances, so it only partially fulfills the transparency requirement.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the core purpose, and contains no redundant wording. Every word contributes value, making it appropriately concise and well-structured.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The description explains what the tool does and what it returns, which covers basic usage. However, it lacks any mention of the sibling batch tool, how they relate, or when to choose one over the other. Given the existence of 'search_images_batch', this is a notable gap in contextual completeness.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema has 100% coverage with detailed descriptions for all six parameters. The tool description adds no additional parameter semantic information, so the baseline of 3 is appropriate.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool searches for images and lists the return data (URLs, thumbnails, dimensions, source pages, metadata). However, it does not distinguish this tool from its sibling 'search_images_batch', so it misses the full specificity of a 5.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus the sibling 'search_images_batch'. There is no mention of alternatives or any situational context, leaving the agent without explicit usage direction.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.